Week 12 - Regulation vs. Economics

This week we looked at Public service broadcasting vs. Private broadcasting in Ireland, from their point of view and how they broadcast according to their own agenda, in regards to television news.

Public Service Broadcaster - Educate, Inform, Entertain. (RTE, BBC etc.)
Private Broadcaster - Entertain, Commercial gain, Monetary reward. (TV3, 3e, UTV, Channel 4 etc.)

When broadcasting the news, primarily this meant a commitment to due impartiality so that no particular political bias or point of view is given prominence. But now, broadcasters are more and more conscious of their ratings. There is a growing pressure to reschedule the news to make way for more "popular" programmes. If you were to apply a newspaper analogy, the television is moving from a broadsheet to tabloid news agenda, where there is an emphasis on the entertainment side of news. Rather than actual important news. News that literally affects our everyday living in a country, pressing issues and debates being reported and discussed in a broadsheet newspaper. Rather than which footballer has slept with who's wife now, something you would see on a regular basis in a tabloid newspaper like "the Sun". We see a "dumbing down" process happening in television broadcasting.

Broadsheet - Political, Economic, Social Affairs.
Tabloid - Entertainment, Personalities/Celebrities.

While most events that happen around the world in raw form are not interesting to an audience and wouldn't hold the attention of the majority of the public. There is a need to package a raw event and deliver it as a narrative using different storytelling and literature techniques. By using different elements in a news story, such as, spoken word, video footage, illustrations, and photographs, creates a sense that the story contains "windows", which allow an audience to see directly into an event as if they were witnessing it then and there, but from the viewers own home.

Like the narration, these elements are abstracted from the stream of events, cropped and cut; and as with the narrative element, they can be given a different meaning. Delivering a preferred meaning, telling people what they should be seeing or noticing, leading people to believe in one side of the story, while not directly telling the audience what side to be on. Therefore, influencing their meaning.

News stories allow us to understand stories that would otherwise be separated to us by culture and languages, they help us to understand. In terms of the news story, we are on the outside, looking in. Coming in for a sample so we can appreciate the larger view.

We should note that news stories don't just bring together all these elements merely by putting them together in a single story or sequence. They are put together in a specific (narrative) way. To create a meaning. They are collected by people, who also have their own personal views and opinions, which may shift into their work, even if they are to remain unbiased on a story. There is always two sides to a story, but broadcasters want to point out what sides you should be "looking at" and give their own slant on a story but not forcing it on you. Its kind of like an underhand tactic for you to see what they want you to see, and believe what they want you to believe.

Week 11 - Media Bias

This week, we looked at the media as a means of production, and marxist and liberal approaches to the media. We were given an assignment to choose a news story/broadcast that involves some degree of political controversy and analyze that content.

There was a couple of stories I thought of that would be a good example of political bias, but none better than the Student Registration/Contribution Fees increase. This story was covered in November 2011, when the Union of Student in Ireland (USI) protested in Dublin City. This article from RTE covers the story.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1116/education.html#article

The reason that this story caught so much attention was due to the fact that earlier that year, 2 weeks before the general election in Ireland, TD Ruairi Quinn had signed a pledge, promising not to increase student fees whilst in government. His party then won the election and with less than a 8 months into term, had proposed to increase student fees two-fold. A controversial move and one that sparked outrage with students across the entire country.

From the start of the article, we know straight away that it is produced from an opposing/protesting point of view from the headline of the article, "Ruairi Quinn non-committal on fees issue". The article, reported by Emma O Kelly, is slightly more sided with the protests, but keeps to a neutral stance on ideology. Evident from the wording that is used, there are several references to figures and numbers within the video. Stating the amount of students there where at the protests (20,000), and how it "filled the streets", but also mentioning the more "conservative" figure stated by the Gardai (12,000), which would lead you to beleive that the Gardai are aiming to keep the figure as low as would be imaginable as not to generate even more hype, or to make it seem as if the protest wasn't as important or to subtract from its potential impact to the Irish public.

There are several interviews with students in the video that placed substantial importance on what the fees mean to those that were interviewed. Then, from a Gardai/Political approach, goes on to highlight the need for safety the student protests, and mentions how it was a "highly patrolled and organised march". This statement is almost straight from a TD's mouth. We see this clearly, from the language that is used, here and throughout the article. The fact that the word "march" was used instead of (what the event actually was) "protest" is to play down the whole event, as the word "protest" is surrounded by negative connotations and promotes violent imagery. This kind of political correctness is used throughout the report, as if to pander the importance of the protests to students and to discourage other sectors in the public from protesting in the future.

RTE promote a liberal political view and ideology (and have been accused of this recently - http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0313/1224313204153.html). They produce a partial view of whats happening in the protests, as to cover the story, but conforms to the higher power in society, being that of the government. Although the reporter does state (from a students point of view) that the protests are directed at him and his controversial decision to increase the education fees.

As discussed in class, the report is in favour of a "hegemonic" view of politics, to maintain the status quo and the way things are. This report reminds me of this approach to re-enforce the dominant ideologies in society, especially those in power, politically and perhaps not as much as past times, religiously. Being coerced into believing that everything is fine, that there is no need to challenge anything the government are doing. After all, we are always being told to think about the future of Ireland, that the government are getting us back on track and you (the tax payer) are providing resources for the greater collective good of Ireland. 

Week 2 - Construction of the "Real"

This week, continuing with the description of what "Media, Discourse and Analysis" actually is, we delve into what it means to analyse a piece of media. As analysts of media, we learn the ability to critique media content, and create an understanding of the underlying message, if any. The reason I say if any, is because there is so much media in the world that, as I stated last week, with all the content the world has on offer, the lines between reality and simulations of reality become blurred.

There is not always an underlying message in media content, as I learned this week. The media may not be as "truthful" as they make out to be. They report a story, or an event, but analysts have a grouping classification. Grouping media content into 3 events:

• Genuine events
• Media events
• Pseudo events

I won't go into detail explaining these, but they reveal that not everything you see on the news is how it is depicted. Genuine, being spontaneous, happening then and there events that you can not prevent, whether there is a camera there to capture it or not, it will still happen, eg. Natural/Ecological events (Volcano, Tsunami etc.), Crime (The 16 year old girl shot in Tallaght recently (Feb 2012)). Media event being, a constructed event, that wound in peculiarities because of the public's expected media coverage, eg. The sensationalism of the Amanda Knox court case last year (2011), where the exaggerated media coverage simple made the trial popularized, when it was no different to another murder trial. Pseudo events are staged events that happen merely to increase media coverage and awareness, it is simply for the entertainment value, eg. The entertainment industry, Celebrities. Its extremely media friendly, and always positive.

Broadcasters arrange the content as to how it will be perceived by the viewers. This is important for media broadcasters and journalists. The whole point of releasing the content is to get the largest viewership imaginable, that is the sole purpose, profit. Who releases a news story the quickest is the most important for the company. Who gets there first, who has the first video coverage, if not then use images, a still by still coverage, it doesn't matter, as long as there is something for the viewer to see, however amateur, just as long as they can claim to get their first, and have a viewable source. If they have incorrect or false coverage, an apology can be issued the next day and the it will be forgotten about.

Being a media analyst involves, being able to decipher and analyse what you see. To look at the media in a critical and analytical manner, and question what you see. Always ask:

• Why (why was the story produced in this way)?
• How (how was it made/produced/distributed)?
• When (live, or as being live. what was the zeitgeist)?
• What (what are the effects on the audience, and the wider social audience)?

We discussed social institutions and the overall "Power of the Media". The media is a hugely influencial factor when it comes to social and cultural image. It can shape how we live our lives, haw we spend our money, and how we view the rest of the world. But it can cause violence, like the London riots last year, it can be argued that media coverage was adding"fuel to the fire". Promote sexual promiscuity, via pop culture. The current trend at the moment with "Tallafornia", "Geordie Shore", and "The Only was is Essex". With the media sensationalizing the ideology of "its ok to go out every night of the week and have sex with strangers". This mentally is fuelled by shows like these. But as I said in a previous paragraph. It doesn't matter, as long as there is a large audience and viewer numbers. The media can even cause corporate collapse, an ironic (ongoing) story being the collapse of the "News of the World", who accessed information illegally to obtain greater viewers/readers but in doing so diminished their own standing and ultimately collapsed.

Overall, the media is replacing the formerly important, or influencial social institutions. Instilling values that are no longer coming from traditional power brokers, eg. Family, or the Church. People are turning to the media for answers. But the media, an accidental social figure head, was not originally intended to be looked upon for answers to peoples livelihood, and moral compass. For some, it is their primary source of understanding of the world. But ultimately, portray a false reality, one that should not be instilled into peoples lives. The media modern media, only simulate a world without consequence.

Along with learning the analytical side of media, we discussed what the term "Discourse" means. Discourse is communicated through the media all of the time, and is deeply embedded in the everyone's daily interactivities and encounters. It is the parameters in which a particluar issue is discussed or framed by the media.

To put it in my own words, its the meaning behind the communication method. A communication method being text, or voice etc. There is meaning to almost everything we say or gesture. This is the called the discourse, the underlying meaning. The term 'text' is used to mean an observable product. The gesture or voice per say.

Discourse is the process, the underlying meaning. It is not the product ('text'). Discourse is manifested by its cultural outlines, the zeitgeist of a culture. It is a product of a meaning. It is someones cultural and social upbringing. How a subculture is viewed for example, when you hear the word priest , you would think of peodophilia. But why... It is because, the zeitgeist (feeling at the time), would suggest, that there have been various scandals and negative news coverage that we would associate all priests with peodophilia. It depends on cultural associate connotations.

A great example of this is, when someone tells a joke, and it did not come across as funny to the receiver, this suggests that the discourse is lost in translation. That you have associated the joke with something that you (personally) thought was funny, due to your associations with the subject of the joke. Where as, the reciever did not, and could have personal and emotional attachment to the subject, therefore making it unfunny.

This happened myself recently when I was dropping my girlfriend home. We would have come from the same different cultural backgrounds and social groups, her being from the south side of Dublin, around the Stillorgan area (very posh), and I, raised in north Dublin all my life (not so posh). I had made a joke using slang terminology (Jargon), commonly associated with the south of Dublin. Where I found it funny, and was expecting her to laugh, I got the complete opposite effect, where she was gravely disgusted. I hadn't taken into consideration her cultural background, or her views on that section of society, one that she was close to, or had associations with. It was interesting to use the knowledge gained in class to analyse that situation.

There is a lot to Discourse, as I learned. Discussing in depth the "Circuit of Culture" (which I will not explain), and how it is used to interpret different sociological and cultural meanings. The sense of naturalism, and culture associates arbitrary meanings to occupations, clothing and colors, for example, Truck driving and nursing are available to both genders, but it is the views of society that only make or females enter either occupation. Where it is not enforced upon, society encourages just male or female to enter the job, and then is seen as abstract that a man is a hairdresser, nurse, or househusband.

These are values instilled only by societal means, there is no laws enforcing association or connotation. It is just what has become the "Norm", what we accept as being right, or the way that it is. And if you differ... well unfortunately, you will become a social outcast. But these things change all that time, society creates different value systems. It is wrong to look down on someone for being different and not abiding by imaginary classification systems. And with discourse, it is interesting to understand underlying cultural conditions to the communication process.

James.